• If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
  • Please note that we've updated the Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord save file system which requires you to take certain steps in order for your save files to be compatible with e1.7.1 and any later updates. You can find the instructions here.

XP learning multiplier should stop at 0.1 but never zero.

XP multiplier lowest possible value 0.1

  • Yay

    Votes: 54 98.2%
  • Nay

    Votes: 1 1.8%

  • Total voters
    55

Users who are viewing this thread

ashenwood

Recruit
I would suggest that the XP learning multiplier never becomes 0 (zero), but it should stop at 0.1 instead. That way you can progress beyond the cap, although extremely slowly.

What do you guys think?
 

ashenwood

Recruit
The way the current XP rate works, 0.1 might as well be 0 anyway, so what's the point?
If it's zero you will never ever be able to earn points. With 0.1 you will at least get 1 skill point for that skill once in a blue moon which in it self is infinitely better than never.

That's is why.
 

The_Hussar

Knight
WBNWWF&S
Yes, I was think about making a post on this issue. I totally agree. The current system is contradictive to the "do and learn" principle that is the basis of this leveling mechanism. For example I was stuck at 0.0 learning on one handed weapons for quite a while and I havewn't leant anything even though I have killed dozens of enemies.

I agree there should be a lowest value for learning that should act as a safe net. Otherwise you could be stuck focusing on 2-3 skills which would prove to be a tedious grind as the levels progress.
 

skoonting

Recruit
If it's zero you will never ever be able to earn points. With 0.1 you will at least get 1 skill point for that skill once in a blue moon which in it self is infinitely better than never.

That's is why.
I don't think you understood my point. The XP earnings currently are so hilariously low, that while you could techincally still increase you skills at 0.1 skill multiplier, it realistically would be indistinguishable from 0. Even reaching the higher skill caps is practically impossible, let alone going beyond that with a 0.1 multiplier
 

ashenwood

Recruit
I don't think you understood my point. The XP earnings currently are so hilariously low, that while you could techincally still increase you skills at 0.1 skill multiplier, it realistically would be indistinguishable from 0. Even reaching the higher skill caps is practically impossible, let alone going beyond that with a 0.1 multiplier

I can then only read your comment as a totally separate discussion concerning how slow skill gain is in the game.

This topic does not raise that issue. It raises the issue of skill gain becoming zero when getting to a certain point in you're skill.
 
The learning multiplier should never go below 0.5, ideally would be 1 at the lowest. I understand the concept with the way it's done now, like your character has a maximum "potential" they can reach, without adding focus or adding stats. But no matter how much or little natural talent or affinity a person has with something, as long as they keep practicing a skill they will get better

The system needs balance, I've already seen a mod that gives you a stat point every level up rather than every 3.

Quick math:
60 total stats * 3 levels = Level 180 to have max(10?? idk) stats if started from all 0's
15 * 6 focus points = Level 90 to have max focus in all skills

Here is my suggestion:
Provide alternate ways to level up other than just pure skilling
Balance stat gain and focus gain so you can end up with a max character at max level
Character creation sets your character to X level depending on stats + focus so that you can end up at level X with max stats and focus

You never want to take away from players in game design, only give to them
 

vemerce

Regular
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
I would suggest that the XP learning multiplier never becomes 0 (zero), but it should stop at 0.1 instead. That way you can progress beyond the cap, although extremely slowly.

What do you guys think?
I have a different opinion on this. I think they should remove "Learning Levels" altogether... Don't cap how much potential a character has to learn something new. Instead, make focus points more valuable by being able to learn certain skills 10x as fast, but keep the learning rates of every skill at 1% base. Why? Because this isn't like Warband and the other M&B titles... Your character has an expiration date and is expected to die and be replaced by another character. There's not a need for such limited progression. Even if you maxed out everything, you're still gonna die and have a hard reset when you change to an heir.
 

Lunny22

Recruit
The learning multiplier should never go below 0.5, ideally would be 1 at the lowest. I understand the concept with the way it's done now, like your character has a maximum "potential" they can reach, without adding focus or adding stats. But no matter how much or little natural talent or affinity a person has with something, as long as they keep practicing a skill they will get better

The system needs balance, I've already seen a mod that gives you a stat point every level up rather than every 3.

Quick math:
60 total stats * 3 levels = Level 180 to have max(10?? idk) stats if started from all 0's
15 * 6 focus points = Level 90 to have max focus in all skills

Here is my suggestion:
Provide alternate ways to level up other than just pure skilling
Balance stat gain and focus gain so you can end up with a max character at max level
Character creation sets your character to X level depending on stats + focus so that you can end up at level X with max stats and focus

You never want to take away from players in game design, only give to them



Ok, but the aim of the game isn't to end with a "maxed out" character. In fact that is beyond ridiculous in what appears to be intended as a generational continual war epic saga type game. No character in history (real or I would imagine even fantasy) is maxed out in every possible stat. Amazing historical warriors were likely not that flash in politics, cunning, etc. Likewise the best political manipulators were probably a bit rubbish with sword or bow in hand. You can't expect to be a master of all trades, just pick what best suits your style and ignore the rest, then fill in with decent companions (unfortunately companions are a bit rubbish, and level/skill up with glacial movement at the moment but hopefully that will improve)
 

JethroKirby

Knight at Arms
WB
I have a different opinion on this. I think they should remove "Learning Levels" altogether... Don't cap how much potential a character has to learn something new. Instead, make focus points more valuable by being able to learn certain skills 10x as fast, but keep the learning rates of every skill at 1% base. Why? Because this isn't like Warband and the other M&B titles... Your character has an expiration date and is expected to die and be replaced by another character. There's not a need for such limited progression. Even if you maxed out everything, you're still gonna die and have a hard reset when you change to an heir.

So much this. I like the skill system and the perks. Maybe it could be changed so that skills are very hard to level without focus points but can still level slowly. I believe the learning limit should be removed as currently it is possible to lock yourselves into a character who can gain any more levels. As has been stated, your character dying is what will prevent your character from being a master of all trades.
 

TheShermanator

Sergeant
Definitely arguments can be made about specific multiplier numbers and corresponding re-balances.

Generally, though, I think the game shines when it imposes consequences - and thus cost/benefit ratios - on player choices. Cliche, but: You can do anything, but not everything.

That said, I agree with the spirit of the OPs point - a really low multiplier would be way better than a 0x multiplier, even if you put points elsewhere.
 

Roger_Dabbit

Recruit
So much this. I like the skill system and the perks. Maybe it could be changed so that skills are very hard to level without focus points but can still level slowly. I believe the learning limit should be removed as currently it is possible to lock yourselves into a character who can gain any more levels. As has been stated, your character dying is what will prevent your character from being a master of all trades.
What's more, it actually gives the player the option to choose whether they allow the aging mechanic to organically limit their character's skill levels since it's an option iirc.

If a player disliked the idea of losing progress, they could continue on, albeit very slowly, at the "capped" rate without fear of the character death and losing any progress at all. A player who is okay with such a setback upon a character death would play with see it organically limit their character's total skill level, but the new heir character would obviously not be impacted by the rate cap, and this gamer could experience multiple kinds of characters over one campaign through the aging and heir system. Everyone gets to enjoy to their taste.
 

pbl

Recruit
Ive had negative exp in smithing before, when i updated from a old patch to that new one that made every skill go up a whole lot of levels
 

pmn1990

Recruit
I would suggest that the XP learning multiplier never becomes 0 (zero), but it should stop at 0.1 instead. That way you can progress beyond the cap, although extremely slowly.

What do you guys think?
The hard cap is so dumb and broken. It wouldnt be bad if you got more attribute points but my character is level 20 and none of my attributes are over 5 and one is still at 3. Its like the game wants you to specialize but in order to level you need to spread points around. I my stewart skill with full focus points has hit a hard cap and no longer levels. Im at like 6 skills right now that no longer lvl
 

vemerce

Regular
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
What's more, it actually gives the player the option to choose whether they allow the aging mechanic to organically limit their character's skill levels since it's an option iirc.

If a player disliked the idea of losing progress, they could continue on, albeit very slowly, at the "capped" rate without fear of the character death and losing any progress at all. A player who is okay with such a setback upon a character death would play with see it organically limit their character's total skill level, but the new heir character would obviously not be impacted by the rate cap, and this gamer could experience multiple kinds of characters over one campaign through the aging and heir system. Everyone gets to enjoy to their taste.
Good ideas, except I don't recall Tale Worlds ever saying that aging and heirs was optional. There's just a vocal minority on the forums saying that it should be over and over again.

The only quote I ever saw from Tale Worlds that even suggested optional aging was Callum once answered a Q&A by saying that aging could probably be modded out.
 
there is also a problem that with increasing level, your learning xp modifiers all drop. So, what you get first is easiest, dont mix up with anything. And on top of that you have increasing exp requirements.

At first you might have 15x exp modifiers, but this gets quickly destroyed to 8x and lower at level 10+ even with lots of points and max focuses in.

What this means, is that if you do tutorial, you get almost 50 free charm levels, about lv 4 and you are already beaten by the leveling nerfstick, because you learned charm instead of other skills.

I would propose that xp modifier doesnt get destroyed by arbitraty level, as it wrecks the ability to grow.

Also, why is non-nerfed skill cap 10 with 2 starting attributes ???!

why is there an attribute point per 4 levels instead of 3 ?
 
Top Bottom